Thomas S. Harrington - Livin' la Vida Barroca

And even though large segments punditocracy and the remaining sentient beings in the population dutifully ate it up, I always had the fear that someone would find me out.

Well, now I really don’t have the votes!! Yippee!

It’s like a huge burden has been lifted off my back.

All speeches all the time! Underdog speeches. Nuanced Father of the Nation speeches on those “tough” moral issues, Grave commander-in-chief speeches.

Any speech the handlers want... and with no need to even pretend I can get anything of consequence done for you the people.

I’m in a good place.

Yours,

Barry

Barack H. Obama

3 November 2010

Netanyahu:

The Intellectual Father of the “War on Terror”

Writing last week on Antiwar.comthe redoubtable Phil Giraldi said:

“The Israel connection is significant because Israel has long been at the heart of America’s foreign policy woes. America’s misguided war on terror is in fact a complete adoption of Israeli security paradigms without any regard for the actual threats that confront the US, making Israel’s many enemies also the foes of Washington. The Israeli Lobby might not have single handedly brought about the disastrous Iraq war but it certainly was a major factor in the push to invade, taking its cues from the Israeli Foreign Ministry.”

Reading Giraldi’s article I thought back, as I have intermittently through the years, to a late night in 1995 when, after a long day’s work, I sat down to watch the Charlie Rose Show in the hopes of getting smarter. Back then, I had not yet realized just how bought-and-paid-for Charlie is (Bloomberg, Sumner Redstone and a long etc. of media magnates underwrite his program) and thus incapable of considering ideas that challenge in any substantial way the notion that the US and Israel are anything but positive factors on the world stage.

In my mind’s eye, I remembered seeing that night’s guest, Benjamin Netanyahu, talk about a book he had written in which he argued for the need of the “West” to engage in a “War on Terror.” I also remember quite clearly chortling out loud at the stupidity and chutzpah of the proposition.

Well I recently went back through the online archives of the program and found the interview. And sure enough, it was exactly as I had remembered it. There was Netanyahu pushing the “War on Terror” as a concept, some six years before the attacks of September 11th, 2001!

I don’t know about you, but I was truly amazed at the alacrity with which the concept of the “War on Terror,” and with it, the thousand some-odd page Patriot Act was rolled out in the wake of the attacks on the Twin Towers. There was no way, I thought then, and I think now, that this stuff was not sitting there in fairly finished form on the shelves of some very high level White House offices.

It seems Netanyahu and/or people very close to him might very well have placed it there.

Netanyahu’s father, Benzion Netanyahu, still alive at 102, is one of the major standard-bearers of Revisionist Zionism, an explicitly expansionist, militaristic and anti-Arab form of Israeli nationalism founded by Ze’ev Jabotinsky in the early part of the 20th century. Given its attraction to energetic action and expansionism, it is not surprising that the movement should have been attracted to Fascism during the thirties. Indeed, an important member of Revisionist Zionism’s Palestine-based guerrilla arm, Abba Ahimier, a great fan of Mussolini, also expressed admiration for Hitler saying in 1932, “Were it not for Hitler’s anti-Semitism, we would not oppose his ideology. Hitler saved Germany.”

After the Second World War, the Revisionists formed guerrilla gangs aimed at terrorizing both the British and the Palestinian natives out of what they saw as their land. Among the members of these cells were Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir, Dalck Feith (Douglas Feith’s father) and Benjamin Emanuel (Rahm Emanuel’s father).

Emanuel’s father, living comfortably in retirement in Chicago, was responsible, according to some sources, for terrorist attacks on buses full of Arabs and of British soldiers in the 1945-48 period. Feith’s father was similarly involved in campaigns to induce terror among non-Jewish residents of Palestine prior to his emigration to the US in 1942.

This gives us some context in which to interpret Benjamin Emanuel’s remarks on accession of his son to the role of White House chief of Staff: “Obviously he’ll influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House.”

After Israeli independence in 1948, the internal politics of the country were dominated by the Labor partywhich believed in the creation of European-style Social Democracy and a relatively discreet maltreatment/dispossession of Palestinians. In this context, the Revisionists were considered to be nuts from the fringe, and as such, were largely cut out of the structures of official power. I have been told by an Israeli academic that this contributed to Netanyahu’s father—a scholar of the Spanish inquisition who had also been Jabotinsky’s personal secretary in New York between 1935-1940—having difficulties in securing a regular academic appointment in Eretz Israel. Hence, he shuttled back and forth several times between that country and the US. This is the reason why Benjamin Netanyahu speaks perfect American English; he spent much of his youth in the US.

This all changed in 1977 when Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir of the Likud Party, a formation rooted deeply in the beliefs of Revisionist Zionism, got elected to power in Israel. They did so, in no small measure, on the basis of their ability to sell their expansionist form of nationalism to the country’s new wave of immigrants, Sephardic Jews from Arab and/or Islamic countries such as Morocco, Iraq, Iran and Yemen, who tended to be of considerably lower educational levels than the European Jews who had made up the bulk of the country’s first and second generations of settlers.

Revisionist Zionism’s long walk in the desert was over. Indeed, since that time the Revisionists have steadily increased their domination over Israeli political life to the point where the Labor Party, like the Democrats in the US, spends much of its life cowering in front of the Likud out of fear of becoming called “antipatriotic” and/or “soft on terror.”

Key to the continued rise of Revisionist Zionism, was the ability to organize key elements of American Jewry around this new, hyper-martial view of the Israeli reality. They did so by infiltrating AIPAC and by flooding the think tanks then being created to prop up the Reagan Revolution (e.g. Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute) with thinkers amenable to their cause, and by founding think tanks of their own (e.g. WINEP, Hudson Institute, Center for Security Policy, JINSA, MEMRI) dedicated wholeheartedly toward promoting a pro-Likud approach to things in the Mideast.

If you were a viewer of the McNeil Lehrer Report in the 80s you saw the first fruits of this propaganda push in abundance when think tank heroes/Reagan appointees/Likudite sympathizers such as like Michael Ledeen, Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams and Paul Wolfowitzwere paraded across our screens almost nightly to ply their bellicose and Israel-centered view of the world to people (PBS viewers) who like to think of themselves as America’s thinking elite. All polite, articulate and calmly spoken, they made “muscular foreign policy” and the “show ‘em who’s boss” treatment of Arabs (and all of the other ungrateful brown people of planet for that matter) seem the most natural and sensible thing in the world.

During the Clinton years, these Neo-cons largely retreated into the think tanks to plan their next assault on power, letting less overtly bellicose pro-Israel types such as Dennis Ross and Martin Indyk (the US correlates of the Laborites Ehud Barack and Shimon Peres) manage Mideast affairs for the Clinton Administration.